The Leader wished to pay
tribute to Cliff Ride, a former Director of Environment at the
council, who recently passed away.

The Leader informed Members
that Ian Bickerton had resigned as a
councillor. He wished to put on record his thanks to his
contributions to the Council whilst he was a Member.

The Leader reminded Members
that Highways England had launched its consultation on the options
for the A417 until 29 March. A consultation event was taking place
at St Andrews Church on 24 February between 11am and
6pm.

The Cabinet Member Clean and
Green Environment was then invited to make a statement on the
crematorium. He explained that on 9 February a Health and Safety
review was undertaken at the crematorium and due to the cremators
operating under positive pressure at times and subsequently
emitting smoke into the crematory area the decision was taken to
stop cremating from Monday 12 February. The welfare of staff was
paramount in taking this last resort decision. Emergency meetings
would be held with service engineers and inspections done as a
matter of urgency to determine the way forward in order to become
fully operational as quickly as possible. Until then all future
bookings had been cancelled and with the funeral directors help all
currently booked cremations would be moved to alternate
crematoriums. He was aware the distress this would cause to
families involved and stressed that if he had any other option he
would be taking it.

The Cabinet Member Clean and
Green Environment went on to say that the service continuity plan
was put into operation straight away and last Tuesday morning, all
of the five coffins from Monday’s services were transported
to Newport, where they were cremated at Westerleigh’s new crematorium. He wished to
reassure everyone that the process would be as dignified as to be
expected. The coffin would leave Cheltenham Crematorium via the
catafalque, through the chapel, and out of the main doors, where it
would be placed into private ambulance ready for transportation.
Upon arrival at Newport, the coffins would be carried into the
chapel, placed on the catafalque where the curtains would be closed
and the coffin taken into the crematory or storage area waiting for
cremation. The ashes from the previous day’s cremations would
be ready to collect and return to Cheltenham. He advised of a
maximum time frame of 72 hours. Cremated remains would be available
for collection from Cheltenham Crematorium in the usual manner once
ready.

Inspection works and repairs
had taken place on both cremators and contractors were on site. A
part was awaited from abroad so it was likely that the service
would be non operational for next week.

He wished to put on record his
thanks to staff who had taken the decision hard. He was confident
however that it was the right decision.
All Members had received updates via press releases at the same
time as those affected i.e. members of the public and funeral
directors. He confirmed that the ...
view the full minutes text for item 5.

Residents in All Saints Villas Road have recently been
experiencing problems with the Council’s Garden Waste
collection service and have reported a number of missed
collections. Residents have been told that this is due to issues
with getting the collection vehicle down their narrow street. Given
residents have to pay for this scheme,
this is clearly very poor service.

How will the Council address the specific problems on All Saints
Villas Road
and numerous other town centre streets which are notoriously
narrow?

Response from Cabinet Member

There have always been access
issues in All Saints Villas Road due the narrowness of the road and
parking on the corners and bend. A
smaller vehicle is now being used to make garden waste collections
in this road and other narrow roads in the town.

2.

Question from Tess Beck
to Cabinet Member Development and Safety, Councillor Andrew
McKinlay (present)

Can it be inferred from the
decision taken by the Licensing Committee on 2/10/2018 that they
agreed with the statement made on behalf of the Two Pigs Management
that any unaccompanied women are likely to be prostitutes, and
should therefore be refused entry to a pub?

Does the council agree with
this and if so how is this compatible with the council's public
sector equality duty?

Response from Cabinet Member

The Council recognises that
Parliament has made it lawful to operate a sex establishment and
that such businesses are a legitimate part of the retail and
leisure industries. It is this council’s role as the
Licensing Authority to administer the licensing regime in
accordance with the law.

To this end, the council is
under a duty to determine applications for sex establishment
licences. Each application is
determined on its individual merits taking into account a wide
range of factors such as; its adopted policy, local comments and
objections, primary legislation and submissions by the applicant
before the relevant Licensing Committee.

The Licensing Committee did not
concur with the supposition that unaccompanied women were likely to
be prostitutes when entering the establishing of Two
Pigs. The Licensing Committee
were keen to relay to the
representatives of the establishment that an inference should not
be drawn by lone women entering the establishment that they were
prostitutes. The Committee reminded the
representatives of the Equality Duty and not displaying any
discriminatory practices or treatment towards women.

The council is fully aware and
follows its Public Sector Equality Duty and its obligations under
it which is relevant when determining any licensing
application.

In a supplementary question
Tess Beck asked the Cabinet Member whether he agreed with the
representative of the Two Pigs management that lap-dancing
increases the risk of prostitution on their premises.

The Cabinet Member responded
that it was entirely up to the Two Pigs management to ensure their
premises are licensed in accordance with the regulations and he did
not agree with the statement made by the questioner.

These must be received no later
than 12 noon on Tuesday 13 February 2018

Minutes:

1.

Question from Councillor Wilkinson to
the Cabinet Member Development and Safety, Councillor Andrew
McKinlay

What assessment is being made of the
impact on the housing market and on communities due to the increase
in Airbnb rentals?

Response from Cabinet Member

It is
unclear at present what impact, if any, Airbnb rentals are having
specifically on the local housing market and on our
communities.

Airbnb
is in effect a lodgings agency that specialises in facilitating
access to short term B and B accommodation. As such it is likely to
have more impact on the Hospitality sector then the Housing sector.
As a result the activities of Airbnb fall outside of the Housing
Licensing regime.

What is
clear is that private rents have increased significantly in
Cheltenham in recent years, with the result that many low income
households are being priced out of the private rented
market.

The
upward pressure on private rents suggests that demand for private
rented accommodation is exceeding supply. This is likely to be
attributable to a number of factors, such as high house prices,
which is resulting in many more households remaining within the
private rented sector for longer.

The
council will be looking to jointly commission with other districts
across the county a new Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA),
once the government have provided further clarity about the
methodology that needs to be followed by local authorities when
commissioning this type of work. Included within the SHMA will be
an assessment of the need for private rented
accommodation.

It is
envisaged that specific issues and pressure points, such as any
potential impact Airbnb rentals are having on the local housing
market, could well be identified then.

2.

Question from Councillor Mason to the
Cabinet Member Finance, Councillor Rowena Hay

When is the Borough Council scheduled to move into
Delta House?

Response from Cabinet Member

Work is
ongoing to develop the relocation strategy which is responding to a
changing landscape.

The
council is undergoing significant transformation in the way in
which staff work and has created agile workspace and promoting
flexible working which is reducing the space needs and is informing
the strategy for the relocation from the Municipal
Offices.

The
council has been activity working with other public sector agencies
on the potential of a public sector hub to serve
residents.

Options
for relocation into alternative accommodation either temporarily or
permanently are kept under continuous. As yet, due to the shortage
of suitable offices, no viable option has been identified. As such,
should this position not change, the council will relocate to Delta
Place in 2024.

3.

Question from Councillor Harman to the
Cabinet Member Housing, Councillor Peter Jeffries

Gloucester City Council has recently announced a 35
per cent reduction in the number of rough sleepers. Understanding
fully that this is only one part of a complex and very human issue,
can the Cabinet Member confirm what progress is being made in
Cheltenham on this issue

The Chief Executive introduced
the report and reminded Members that in July 2017 Council had
resolved that a phased approach to the review of the
authority’s senior leadership team and service managers be
undertaken. This report aimed to put in place the key building
blocks for an executive board structure with the necessary skills,
capacity and capabilities for the future.

She highlighted that going
forward it was important for Members to have confidence that the
council’s finances continued to be managed well and that
officers safely navigated through issues such as business rate
retention and the fair funding regime. It was also important that
the necessary skills were in place to strike a balance between
taking more commercial opportunities whilst maintaining our
reputation of strong financial stewardship. The first key building
block therefore related to financial sustainability and was
reflected in the post of Executive Director-Finance and
Assets.

The Chief Executive went on to
say that the proposed executive board structure reflected the
broader approach to place shaping in its widest sense which was not
simply limited to economic growth and developing the physical place
in a way that was sustainable but also reflected an ambition for
inclusive growth as well as contributing to the sense of place and
how Cheltenham felt as a place. This was reflected in the second
key building block in the post of Managing Director Place and
Growth.

She then highlighted that gaps
had been identified in the current executive board team principally
in relation to capacity coupled with experience and capabilities in
authority-wide service modernisation and organisational change.
Work was currently underway to consider what the future service
management organisational model could look like and that a very high level initial business case
was being developed. She highlighted that the potential level of
change should not be underestimated and therefore the third key
building block was reflected in the new post of Executive Director
People and Change.

The final issue which arose
from her assessment was that of capacity at executive director
level to both manage and deliver key corporate projects whilst also
delivering authority wide modernisation. The need to address both
these issues had therefore informed the proposal to create the new
Executive Director post. This would result in the Director of
Resources and Corporate Projects post being deleted, and with his
agreement, the current post-holder flexibly retiring and his
appointment to a new transitional, part-time role of
Director-Corporate Projects.

The Chief Executive reported
that formal consultation had taken place with those directly
affected and this was reported to the Appointments and Remuneration
Committee in January. The financial implications of this phase 1
review were outlined in the report with the flexible retirement
approach being of less cost to the authority than compulsory
redundancy as well as retaining for a period of time a very
experienced director. In addition, she explained that the budgetary
cost of recruitment to the new Executive Director post would also
need Council approval.

The Cabinet Member Finance introduced the
report which summarized the revised budget for 2017/18 and the
Cabinet’s final budget proposals and pay policy statement for
2018/19. Her introduction is attached
in full to these minutes.

The budget was seconded by
Councillor Jordan.

A question was raised by a
Member as to how the budget was prepared in chaotic circumstances
owing to the wrong figures being published by the Valuation Office
Agency. In response the Cabinet Member Finance said that apparently
the Minister was aware the figures were incorrect before he
published and as the consultation period had closed there was no
opportunity for local authorities to comment on the fact that this
authority had received momentarily an increased tariff of
£454k from the proposed provisional settlement as detailed in
section 5 of the Section 151 Officers report.

Group Leaders were invited to
address Council.

In the absence of Councillor
Harman, Conservative group leader, Councillor Babbage spoke on
behalf of the Conservative group. He paid tribute and thanks to
those who had been involved in producing this draft budget . He
also thanked officers for their support to the budget scrutiny
working group. He informed Members that two amendments to the
budget would be put forward by his group.

On behalf of the People Against
Bureaucracy group Councillor Stennett
recognised the professionalism of the finance team particularly in
this new changing environment of reducing government
support.

The following questions and
comments were raised on the amendment and responses given
:

·It was questioned as to how soon a reduction in the
number of councillors and the move to 4 yearly elections could be
implemented bearing in mind this would involve changes to electoral
arrangements to be agreed with the Electoral Commission. The
potential savings from the amendment were proposed to be spent in
2018/19 and would this be possible without a further increase in
council tax ?

·Some Members felt that this proposal should have
been raised prior to this meeting as the implications of the
changes could have been worked through. Changes to revenue amounted
to £300k and it was difficult to see how this could be done
without putting at risk some services which were important to the
town, e.g. Leisure @

·Some Members felt that with regard to car parking
charges it would be sensible if the Cabinet Member of the County
Council and the CBC Cabinet Member could discuss an integrated
parking solution for Cheltenham rather than a piecemeal
approach.

The Cabinet Member Finance
introduced the report which summarised the Housing Revenue Account
(HRA) revised forecast for 2017/18 and the Cabinet’s budget
proposals for 2018/19.

She referred to the
Government’s rent reduction policy of reducing rents by 1%
per annum which had meant that CBH had to make provision to
mitigate the loss of £6.7 million in rental income up to
2020. Beyond that Government had now confirmed that the rent policy
will revert back to annual increases of up to CPI plus 1% per annum
for the following five years until the next review.

She believed that the approach
CBH had taken was a balanced one, making management and maintenance
savings of £1,421 million, realigning the capital programme
and the use of revenue reserves together with some smaller cost
savings. By this approach CBH were able to maintain existing
service levels, retain the decent homes standard, continue delivery
of the major windows and doors replacement and complete the new
build programme.

She highlighted the impact of
the introduction of Universal Credit which was set out in the
report and the steps CBH were taking to provide support and
information to all tenants affected by these changes.

She highlighted the difficult
of finalising a 30 year business plan when in reality there was so
much change happening at short notice but the projections had been
updated to reflect the current situation as set out in the
report.

She highlighted some of the achievements on CBH and CBC.
These included over three and a half million of spending on repairs
and maintenance, and nearly eight
million on property improvements and major works, one and a half
million on new build and acquisitions, and the continuing spending
on benefits advice, employment initiatives and services for older
and disabled people.

She concluded by thanking all
of CBH’s team for ensuring that the challenges they face will
still include some new builds, deliver the same level of service to
tenants, in particular the valuable work in terms of tenant
wellbeing around debt and money advice, community support &
activity events, and to see that supporting the council’s
older tenants living in supported accommodation despite the last
few years in decreased funding will all continue. She acknowledged
the thought and hard work that had gone into preparing the revised
budget.

In response to a question from
a Member regarding her confidence that the Government would keep to
its policy that rent increases would be restricted to 1%, the
Cabinet Member advised that there were no guarantees in life but
the council and CBH would continue to react swiftly to any changes
announced by Government.

A Member commented that they
looked forward to the day when CBH could include a building company
which would be in a position to build new homes and would provide
valuable opportunities for taking on and training apprentices. The
Cabinet Member Housing advised that he had regular conversations
with CBH on this suggestion and would keep Members informed of any
changes. He ...
view the full minutes text for item 11.

The Cabinet Member Finance introduced the report and
explained that under the CIPFA code the council must report
annually on its treasury management strategy statement which
incorporated the investment strategy and its prudential indicators
.

She reported that CIPFA had published new editions
of Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice and
Cross-sectoral Guidance Notes and the Prudential Code for Capital
Finance in Local Authorities in December 2017. In response to these changes, Council should
consider the Treasury Management Strategy for 2018/19 based upon
the requirements of the 2011 Code and in line with current
governance practices. The changes to the Prudential Code had
introduced a requirement for the Council to approve a Capital
Strategy with effect from 2018/19.

Since this report had been considered by the
Treasury Management Panel and Cabinet, expectations had been raised
that further interest rate rises were likely to happen sooner and
to a higher level than previously anticipated by
markets.

The treasury strategy statement and annual
investment strategy formed part of appendix 2 and she drew
members’ attention to the revisions made to the lending and
parameter list on page 86 table 2.

She reported that during the 2017/18 financial year
the council decided to look into alternative investments outside
the traditional bank deposits. It currently had £3m invested
in the CCLA Property Fund which was generating returns of 4.5%.
This had brought an additional £35k over and above the
revised 2017/18 investment income budget, and with new investments
in other Pooled Funds had seen the expected gross income surplus of
£307k for 2018/19.

The Cabinet Member Finance concluded by putting on
record her thanks to the Treasury Management team.

The following questions and comments were raised
:

·Following changes to UK legislation to better
protect customers and the day-to-day banking services they relied
on where did the council’s investments sit ? The Chief Finance Officer explained that the
council’s current accounts were held with Lloyds bank plc and
this was therefore considered “retail”. He undertook to provide a written response to
Members with regard to the council’s treasury
deposits.

·A Member commended the quality of the recent
presentation by the council’s new treasury advisors
Arlingclose at Treasury Management
Panel.

·Members recognised the importance of moving deposits
away from the High Street banks as this was not keeping up with
inflation. It was acknowledged that changing from a risk averse
approach to a more pragmatic approach was necessary to aid the
Medium Term Financial Strategy.

·A question was raised in terms of the item in the
treasury report last year with regard to the council’s
£30k investment in a local shopping app designed by a seed
company. The Leader informed that the council had shared its
investment with the BID on a 50:50 basis but having reviewed the
success of the app it had decided not to progress the investment
further. The Chief Finance Officer undertook to provide a full
update to Members on this.

The Cabinet Member Finance
introduced the report and said that having agreed its budget and
level of council tax for 2018/19, Council was required to formally
approve the total Council Tax for residents of Cheltenham,
including the Council Tax requirements of the precepting organisations, Gloucestershire County
Council and Gloucestershire Police.

It was important to note that
the relevant basic amount of council tax for the financial year
2018/19, which reflected a 2.99% and £5.89 increase, was not
excessive in accordance with the principles approved by the
Secretary of State under Section 52ZB of the Local Government
Finance Act 1992 as amended and the Referendums Relating to Council
Tax Increases (Principles) (England) Report 2018/19 and, therefore,
the requirement to hold a referendum was not engaged.

Upon a recorded vote the
recommendations were CARRIED unanimously

RESOLVED THAT

The
formal Council Tax resolution at Appendix 2 be approved and that
the commentary in respect of the increase in Council Tax at
Paragraph 6 of Appendix 2 be noted.

The Chief Executive introduced
the report and reminded Members that Councillor Bernard Fisher had
served as Deputy Mayor since last year’s Council meeting and
that Members would be asked to elect him as Mayor at this
year’s Annual meeting.

With regard to the appointment
of Deputy Mayor for 2018-19, she explained that the Members listed
at Appendix 2 to the report had been approached, in order of
precedence, to ascertain if they would be willing and able to have
their name put forward for that appointment. In so doing, some
Members had highlighted that their decision on whether to put
themselves forward for the role may depend on the results of the
borough elections this May. Therefore, having consulted informally
the Group Leaders in January, it was now proposed that no
nomination for Deputy Mayor elect was put forward at this stage and
that the nomination for Deputy Mayor be put to Annual council in
May following the borough elections.

RESOLVED THAT

i)The Order of Precedence in Appendix 2 be
noted.

ii)That Councillor Bernard Fisher be put to the Annual
Council Meeting for election as Mayor for the Municipal year 2018 -
2019.

iii)That the nomination for Deputy Mayor for the
Municipal year 2018 – 2019 be put to the Annual Council
Meeting.